An investigation or diversion?

July 7, 2013

As I read through the collection of odd thought processes, completely made up "facts" and conspiracy theories that are proven baseless one after another, it becomes painfully obvious that these tea party writers are dim of wit, morally damaged and brainwashed beyond the point of reasoned analysis. Nothing but hatred determines their outlook and their path into devolution.

One might ask what I believe to be the motivations behind this behavior. Amigos, it's time for me to speculate, even though I intend to cheat by employing logic and sanity-based reason.

My belief is that the motivations from the extreme right are simple and easily determined. Is there racism? Undoubtedly. Are there sore losers? Absolutely. Are there those who are blinded by religious beliefs that most of us find unsubstantiated? Certainly.

Are there those who are baffled by a leadership that will use any and all of the aforementioned motivations to advance their sinister political ambitions? Most definitely.

Allow me to provide two examples to illustrate my point, one from a local writer and the other from a supposed Republican leader.

The local writer calls our president "our vactioner in chief" and wants the president to release his academic transcripts.

My answer - Bush went to Africa, at our expense, ostensibly to prove that he can't dance. He took more vacation time than Obama and Clinton together. Also, why would one ask for academic records from only one president in history? What's different about this president from any other? One of these things is not like the other.

By the way, one would think, that if any president was asked for his academic records, it most likely would be G.W. Bush.

That would bring us to Daryl Issa and his continuous investigations of all things Obama, regardless of any connection to Obama.

Real investigators, let me know if I am wrong. Investigations always begin with, first, the gathering of evidence and testimony; second, a conclusion; and third, the release of that conclusion.

Issa's investigation begins with a conclusion that the president did it. He gathers evidence that supports his conclusion and suppresses all else and then doesn't stop until someone makes up a new scandal.

The factual story is that the IRS supervisor in Cincinnati described himself as a conservative Republican and was unaware of any connection between the White House and his office.

Ira Cummings has since released this and the fact that progressive organizations were also scrutinized. Only one group was denied tax-exempt status - it was progressive.

Issa's self-serving and diversionary tactic only obscures any effort to solve the problem. In 1959, the law stated that tax deferment should be exclusively given to apolitical organizations.

The IRS regulation changed exclusively to primarily apolitical. If you wish to know the difference between the words, try telling your wife or girlfriend that while she thought you were dating exclusively, you were only dating primarily. There is your problem.

Isn't it time that tea partiers rewarded Democrats for their Social Security and Medicare?